Intentional homicide is a major crime against physical integrity; under the Iranian legal system, it can lead to *qisas* (retribution) if statutory conditions are met. Despite the significance of intent and the mental element in establishing premeditation, the Iranian Islamic Penal Code does not establish a distinct legal category or a graded system to differentiate between intentional homicide committed after reflection, planning, and prior decision-making, and homicide occurring in sudden, emotionally charged, or crisis situations. This approach warrants reconsideration regarding the proportionality of crime and punishment, the individualization of the penal response, and the varying degrees of culpability and the offender's dangerousness. Employing a descriptive-analytical method and a literature review, this article first examines the Iranian legal framework—specifically Article 290 of the Islamic Penal Code—and then analyzes the possibilities and limitations of distinguishing between premeditated homicide and other forms of intentional homicide through a comparative study of legal systems in the United States, England, Canada, France, Iraq, and Egypt. The primary finding is that while comparative experience offers valuable insights for designing a differentiated penal response, the uncritical adoption of foreign models—without regard for jurisprudential foundations, the structure of *qisas*, and the rights of the victim's next of kin—is unjustified. It is recommended that the legislature, while preserving the fundamental tenets of Iranian law, formally recognize the implications of premeditation through clear, provable criteria—particularly regarding the assessment of liability,